Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai

Anuj Pravinchandra Shah, Mumbai vs Asst Cit Cen Cir 42, Mumbai on 30 November, 2018

           IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                MUMBAI BENCHES "A", MUMBAI

      BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
                         AND
     SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

                      ITA No.1232/Mum/2016
                     Assessment Year : 2011-12

 Shri Anuj Pravinchandra Shah,          Asst. Commissioner of Income
 46, Hira Niwas, 1st Floor,             Tax,
 Mody Street, Fort,                 Vs. Central Circle -42,
 MUMBAI                                 MUMBAI
 [PAN : AADPS 4937 M]

           (Appellant)                          (Respondent)


        Appellant By           : Shri Sanjay Parikh, AR
        Respondent By          : Shri Satishchandra Rajore, DR


Date of Hearing : 28-11-2018      Date of Pronouncement : 30-11-2018

                               ORDER


   Per Mahavir Singh, Judicial Member:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-49, Mumbai, dated 01-01-2016 in Appeal No. CIT(A)-49/IT-39/2014-15. The assessment was framed by the ACIT, Central Circle-42, Mumbai u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [herein after referred to as 'Act'] for the AY 2011-12, vide his order dated 28-03-2014. 2 ITA No. 1232/Mum/2016

2. The only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the addition of ₹ 29,01,843/- based on loose papers as against ₹ 12,00,000/-. For this, assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:

"1. The learned CIT(Appeals) ought to have deleted the entire addition of ₹ 29,01,843/- based on loose papers as against ₹ 12,00,000/- deleted by him".

3. Briefly stated facts are that a survey action has been conducted on the assessee on 10-01-2011. The survey action was a part of a search action conducted on the Lodha Group of companies. During the course of search operation on Lodha Group of cases, loose papers numbered 1 to 49 seized and identified as Annexure A-1 from the premises of Shri Somnath Nair on whom also search was conducted. From these papers, the AO made addition amounting to ₹19,01,843/-. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) also confirmed the addition. Aggrieved, now, the assessee came in second appeal before the Tribunal.

4. We have heard rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. Before us, assessee contended that out of this ₹19,01,843/-, it is contesting only for ₹ 15 Lakhs. 3 ITA No. 1232/Mum/2016 Ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the seized papers filed in assessee's paper book at Page Nos. 11 & 12, wherein on page 11 the relevant entries of ₹ 5 Lakhs on 27-12- 2010 and another entry of ₹ 5 Lakhs on 27-12-2010 is reflectd. On page No. 12 of the seized papers the entry of ₹ 10 Lakhs is dated 04-01-2011 and another entry of ₹ 10 Lakhs on 03-01- 2011 is reflected. Ld. Counsel further drew our attention to the peak worked out by the assessee and the relevant entries disclosed, reads as under:

Anuj P. Shah A.Y. 2011-2012 Working of peak Sr.No. Date Paid Receipt Balance 1 .. .. .. ..
2 .. .. .. ...
  ..           ..               ..            ..              ..
  14       27.12.2010                       5,00,000      44,50,000
           28.12.2010
  15           ..               ..           ..              ..
  ..           ..               ..           ..              ..
  19       03.01.2011        10,00,000             --     61,02,103
           04.01.2011



4.1. Ld. Counsel for the assessee clearly stated that once the entries are considered for 27-12-2010 i.e., amounting to ₹ 5 Lakhs each, the same cannot be considered again in the peak.

Similarly about ₹ 10 Lakhs also, the ₹ 10 Lakhs on 04-01-2011 4 ITA No. 1232/Mum/2016 and 03-01-2011 is once considered, it cannot be considered as double. And, this tantamount to double addition in the case of addition peak entry. We find force in the argument of Ld. Counsel and hence we delete the addition of ₹ 15 Lakhs out of the total peak computed by AO at ₹ 19,01,843/-. While considering the peak addition the entry recorded in the loose papers cannot be considered twice i.e. the same entry. Hence, we delete the addition of ₹ 15 Lakhs and allow the appeal of assessee partly.

5. In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 30th day of November, 2018 Sd/- Sd/-

(MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 30th November, 2018 TNMM 5 ITA No. 1232/Mum/2016 Copy of the Order forwarded to :

1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent
3. The CIT(A),Mumbai
4. The CIT
5. DR, 'A' Bench, ITAT, Mumbai BY ORDER, #True Copy # Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai